Compared with standard medical therapy (SMT), noninvasive ventilation (NIV) does not reduce the need for reintubation in unselected patients who develop respiratory failure after extubation. The goal of this study was to assess whether early application of NIV, immediately after extubation, is effective in preventing postextubation respiratory failure in an at-risk population. Multiple-center, randomized controlled study. Multiple hospitals. Ninety-seven consecutive patients with similar baseline characteristics, requiring >48 hrs of mechanical ventilation and considered at risk of developing postextubation respiratory failure (i.e., patients who had hypercapnia, congestive heart failure, ineffective cough and excessive tracheobronchial secretions, more than one failure of a weaning trial, more than one comorbid condition, and upper airway obstruction). After a successful weaning trial, the patients were randomized to receive NIV for > or = 8 hrs a day in the first 48 hrs or SMT. Primary outcome was the need for reintubation according to standardized criteria. Secondary outcomes were intensive care unit and hospital mortality, as well as time spent in the intensive care unit and in hospital. Compared with the SMT group, the NIV group had a lower rate of reintubation (four of 48 vs. 12 of 49; p = .027). The need for reintubation was associated with a higher risk of mortality (p < .01). The use of NIV resulted in a reduction of risk of intensive care unit mortality (-10%, p < .01), mediated by the reduction for the need of reintubation. NIV was more effective than SMT in preventing postextubation respiratory failure in a population considered at risk of developing this complication.

A prospective survey was performed over a period of 3 wk among 42 intensive care units to assess the incidence of use and effectiveness of noninvasive mechanical ventilation (NIV) in clinical practice. All patients requiring ventilatory support for acute respiratory failure (ARF), either with endotracheal intubation (ETI) or NIV, were included. Ventilatory support was required in 689 patients, 581 with ETI and 108 (16%) with NIV (35% of patients not intubated on admission). Reasons for mechanical ventilation were coma (30%), cardiogenic pulmonary edema (7%), and hypoxemic (48%) and hypercapnic ARF (15%). NIV was never used for patients in coma (who were excluded from further analysis), but was used in 14% of patients with hypoxemic ARF, in 27% of those with pulmonary edema, and in 50% of those with hypercapnic ARF. NIV was followed by ETI in 40% of cases. The incidence of both nosocomial pneumonia (10% versus 19%, p = 0.03), and mortality (22% versus 41%, p < 0.001) was lower in NIV patients than in those with ETI. After adjusting for differences at baseline, Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II (odds ratio [OR] = 1.05 per point; confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.06), McCabe/Jackson score (OR = 2.18; CI: 1.57 to 3.03), and hypoxemic ARF (OR = 2.30; CI: 1.33 to 4.01) were identified as risk factors explaining mortality; success of NIV was associated with a lower risk of pneumonia (OR = 0.06; CI: 0.01 to 0.45) and of death (OR = 0.16; CI: 0.05 to 0.54). In NIV patients, SAPS II and a poor clinical tolerance predicted secondary ETI. Failure of NIV was associated with a longer length of stay. In conclusion, NIV can be successful in selected patients, and is associated with a lower risk of pneumonia and death than is ETI.

Background: While the role of acute non-invasive ventilation (NIV) has been shown to improve outcome in acute life-threatening hypercapnic respiratory failure in COPD, the evidence of clinical efficacy of long-term home NIV (LTH-NIV) for management of COPD is less. This document provides evidence-based recommendations for the clinical application of LTH-NIV in chronic hypercapnic COPD patients.Materials and methods: The European Respiratory Society task force committee was composed of clinicians, methodologists and experts in the field of LTH-NIV. The committee developed recommendations based on the GRADE (Grading, Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology. The GRADE Evidence to Decision framework was used to formulate recommendations. A number of topics were addressed under a narrative format which provides a useful context for clinicians and patients.Results: The task force committee delivered conditional recommendations for four actionable PICO (target population-intervention-comparator-outcome) questions, 1) suggesting for the use of LTH-NIV in stable hypercapnic COPD; 2) suggesting for the use of LTH-NIV in COPD patients following a COPD exacerbation requiring acute NIV 3) suggesting for the use of NIV settings targeting a reduction in carbon dioxide and 4) suggesting for using fixed pressure support as first choice ventilator mode.Conclusions: Managing hypercapnia may be an important intervention for improving the health outcome of COPD patients with chronic respiratory failure. The task force conditionally supports the application of LTH-NIV to improve health outcome by targeting a reduction in carbon dioxide in COPD patients with persistent hypercapnic respiratory failure. These recommendations should be applied in clinical practice by practitioners that routinely care for chronic hypercapnic COPD patients.

Introduction: The severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 outbreak spread rapidly in Italy and the lack of intensive care unit (ICU) beds soon became evident, forcing the application of noninvasive respiratory support (NRS) outside the ICU, raising concerns over staff contamination. We aimed to analyse the safety of the hospital staff and the feasibility and outcomes of NRS applied to patients outside the ICU.Methods: In this observational study, data from 670 consecutive patients with confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 referred to pulmonology units in nine hospitals between March 1 and May 10, 2020 were analysed. Data collected included medication, mode and usage of NRS (i.e.high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC), continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), noninvasive ventilation (NIV)), length of stay in hospital, endotracheal intubation (ETI) and deaths.Results: 42 (11.1%) healthcare workers tested positive for infection, but only three of them required hospitalisation. Data are reported for all patients (69.3% male), whose mean±sdage was 68±13 years. The arterial oxygen tension/inspiratory oxygen fraction ratio at baseline was 152±79, and the majority (49.3%) of patients were treated with CPAP. The overall unadjusted 30-day mortality rate was 26.9%, with 16%, 30% and 30% for HFNC, CPAP and NIV, respectively, while the total ETI rate was 27%, with 29%, 25% and 28%, respectively; the relative probability of death was not related to the NRS used after adjustment for confounders. ETI and length of stay were not different among the groups. Mortality rate increased with age and comorbidity class progression.Conclusions: The application of NRS outside the ICU is feasible and associated with favourable outcomes. Nonetheless, it was associated with a risk of staff contamination.

Objective. We reviewed data of 208 episodes of acute respiratory failure due to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treated by non-invasive ventilation (NIV) in our Respiratory Intensive Care Unit (RICU) from its opening in 1992 to 1999. Material and methods. We assessed whether the rate of NIV success, the severity of the disease, and the associated costs changed in this period during which the staff and the equipment did not change. Results. The failure rate was constant over the years (17.2% on average). The severity of the episodes of ARF, defined by pH and APACHE II at admission, worsened during the years. The statistical change point test allowed us to identify 1997 as the year of a significant change in the severity of admission pH and therefore to identify two different periods: 1992–1996 (mean pH = 7.25±0.07) and 1997–1999 (7.20±0.08; P<0.001). In this latter period the risk of failure for a patient with a pH 7.28 were treated in the Medical Ward (20% vs 60%). This allowed a significant reduction of daily cost per patient treated with NIV (558±8 Euros vs 470±14 Euros, respectively; P<0.01). Conclusions. We conclude that, over time, experience with NIV may progressively allow more severely ill patients to be treated without changing the rate of success. The daily cost of NIV per patient can be reduced by treating less severely ill patients outside the RICU.